Osh Resistance Protesting Westernized OSCE Cops Causes Delay In Incursion

OSH, Kyrgyzstan – The Associated Press
Mayor Melis Myrzakmatov delivers a speech during an opposition rally in Osh on Friday. AFP photo

Mayor Melis Myrzakmatov delivers a speech during an opposition rally in Osh on Friday. AFP photo

Kyrgyzstan’s interim government suffered a humiliating blow Friday as a powerful opponent refused to step down as mayor of a southern city devastated by deadly ethnic violence two months ago.

Osh Mayor Melis Myrzakmatov – a self-avowed Kyrgyz nationalist of former Soviet republic in Central Asia – told a rally of about 3,000 people in the city’s main square that he would defy government efforts to have him fired.

“I am going nowhere. I am with the people, I am with you,” Myrzakmatov told the crowd to loud cheers.

The mayor’s show of force challenged the authority of the interim government, which took power after former President Kurmanbek Bakiyev was ousted in a bloody street revolt in April. In June, renewed violence between ethnic Kyrgyz mobs and minority Uzbeks killed at least 370 people, mainly Uzbeks, and forced 400,000 others to flee.

Myrzakmatov, a former Bakiyev loyalist, has fought to keep his job despite his ally’s ouster. The mayor’s supporters delivered fiery speeches at Friday’s rally condemning the government and calling for interim President Roza Otunbayeva to step down.

Government deputy leader Azimbek Beknazarov – who stood flanked by bodyguards and holding a reinforced briefcase to his chest at the mayor’s rally Friday – was heckled when he gave a brief speech confirming that “Myrzakmatov is still the mayor of Osh, even though he was offered other jobs in the interim government.”

Some in the crowd then lashed out at Beknazarov, hitting and kicking him before his security detail whisked him away.

An analyst said the rally showed the country was in danger of splitting between two camps claiming legitimacy of power.

“The government has essentially lost control of part of the country,” said Paul Quinn-Judge, Central Asian project director for International Crisis Group.

Hundreds of Myrzakmatov’s supporters gathered Thursday in Osh amid mounting speculation that the government planned to dismiss him as mayor.

Tensions rose further after Myrzakmatov told Russian newspaper Kommersant in an interview published Thursday he would refuse to recognize the interim government’s authority and would not acknowledge the legitimacy of its decrees.

“This further undermines the diminishing authority of the president, who put her prestige and authority very much behind removing Melis Myrzakmatov,” Quinn-Judge said.

Myrzakmatov has alarmed the government by making strong nationalist statements perceived as marginalizing the Uzbek community, stoking fears of renewed ethnic clashes.

Speaking at the rally, Osh’s police chief Kursan Asanov also offered support to Myrzakmatov – adding to concern about the central government’s control over law enforcement in the south.

Osh, Kyrgyzstan’s second-largest city, was a power base for the ousted president and his family. The ethnically mixed city of Kyrgyz and Uzbeks lies on the fringe of the fertile Ferghana Valley near Uzbekistan and Tajikistan on one of the most heavily used routes for Afghan heroin heading to Russia.

Many in the city have criticized the government’s recent decision to invite a 52-member delegation of police advisers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

Amid the protests, the unarmed force looks unlikely to arrive next week as the government had hoped.

Otunbayeva went to Armenia on Thursday for an informal summit of the Russian-dominated security grouping of several ex-Soviet nations, the Collective Security Treaty Organization, CSTO.

Quinn-Judge suggested her decision to leave Kyrgyzstan as her government’s authority was being questioned could further erode her standing.

Kyrgyzstan, which hosts both U.S. and Russian military bases, plans to hold parliamentary elections in October in which current interim government members are barred from entering. A June constitutional referendum also reduced presidential powers in favor of those of the parliament.


Turkey Inherits the War, As Iraq Tensions Escalate

ANKARA – Hürriyet Daily News

The U.S. withdrawal from Iraq could lead to a civil war in the country unless a stable government is formed, experts have warned, noting that the outcome would have negative impacts on Turkey.

“The biggest concern is a possible clash between Kurds and Arabs, Turkomen and Kurds or Shiites and Sunnis, which would directly have an impact on Turkey. The second concern is that instability might create a convenient environment for terrorists,” Sedat Laçiner, the coordinator of the International Strategic Research Organization, or USAK, told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review on Friday.

The difficulties Iraq has had in forming a Cabinet have prompted concerns in both Turkey and the United States about the country’s future in the wake of the ongoing troop withdrawal, which will be concluded in 2011. All combat troops have already completed the pullout, with 50,000 American soldiers remaining in Iraq to assist Iraqi security forces.

In this environment, Turkey’s main concern is whether Iraq will be able to maintain its unity, or whether instability in the country will spark divisions.

“Any clash between groups might lead to violence. There are concerns that an international force like in Afghanistan might be needed in Iraq too,” Laçiner said, noting that Turkey could be drawn into a clash between Kurds and Arabs if Turkomen became involved.

Instability in Iraq could also lead to an increase in terrorist attacks, not just by the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, which has bases in northern Iraq, but by other groups as well.

“In such a case, not only the PKK, but also Turkish Hizbollah or even al-Qaeda could directly or indirectly affect Turkey. They could easily supply arms or hide terrorists in Iraq,” Laçiner said. “In the event of an increasing threat of PKK attacks, Turkey might have to ensure its security in northern Iraq with a military presence.”

Even the current efforts to put together a government in Iraq may be put at risk by the pullout, said Serhat Erkmen, an expert from the Center for Middle Eastern Strategic Studies. “If they cannot manage a stable government in Iraq, it may lead to clashes between groups. For instance, clashes between Arabs and Kurds in northern Iraq could bring about disintegration and that would affect Turkey,” Erkmen told the Daily News on Friday.

He added, however, that the troop withdrawal would not create any serious change in the short term to the United States’ political presence in Iraq. “The current cooperation between Turkey and the U.S. will continue regarding the struggle against PKK,” he said.

Turkey has been actively engaged in efforts to form a unity government in Iraq since the general elections in the spring. It has hosted representatives of different groups in Ankara to push them to accept the formation of a government that could best represent and stabilize the country. The issue came to the agenda of Turkey’s top security board Thursday as members discussed the efforts to establish a government in Iraq.

American Delegation Delivers Godfather’s Threat To Cut Turkey’s Economic Throat

ANKARA – Hürriyet Daily News

World powers, led by Washington, backed a fourth round of United Nations sanctions against Iran on June 9, cold-shouldering a Turkey-Brazil-brokered nuclear swap plan.  AP photo

World powers, led by Washington, backed a fourth round of United Nations sanctions against Iran on June 9, cold-shouldering a Turkey-Brazil-brokered nuclear swap plan. AP photo

Turkish companies that continue their relations with Iran in defiance of sanctions risk having all business ties with the United States severed, a U.S. government delegation to Turkey has reportedly warned.

The United States says it will enforce sanctions against Turkish organizations investing in Iran’s energy sector and those that sell processed petrol products to Iran.

“A group visited this week from the Treasury Department and discussed the new U.S. legislation on the U.N.’s decision [to impose] sanctions against Iran. There are Turkish companies that want to do business with the United States and they should be aware of the latest law,” Deborah Guido, the spokeswoman of the U.S. Embassy to Turkey, told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review on Friday.

Daily Cumhuriyet reported Friday that a U.S. delegation visited Ankara in order to discuss outcomes of the new U.S. Iranian Sanctions Law, which was influenced by the United Nations Security Council’s judgment that “Iran is funding its arms through its energy sector.” The law targets Iran’s energy sector and states that companies doing business with the Islamic republic will be blacklisted by the United States and be subject to sanctions.

Since the law binds third countries that have relations with Iran, Turkey also would be affected, the officials said. According to the daily, “All companies investing in the Iranian energy sector above a certain amount will enter the U.S. blacklist and be subject to sanctions.”

World powers, led by Washington, backed a fourth round of United Nations sanctions against Iran on June 9, cold-shouldering a Turkey-Brazil-brokered nuclear swap plan. The U.N. sanctions have been followed by unilateral punitive measures imposed by the U.S. and the European Union.

In addition to the sanctions threat, firms that continue relations with Iran risk losing all business connections with the United States. The sanctions will be carried out in nine areas, from import-export permits to credit opportunities.

The United States has said that the banking sector, including government banks, must take action in order to put effective international pressure on Iran over its controversial nuclear program. The U.S. law, passed July 1, contains a list of international private and state-owned banks – including Turkish banks – having connections with Iranian banks. These banks have been warned to cease money transfers to their Iranian counterparts or risk the severing of relations with the United States.

Turkey has said that enforcing sanctions toward Iran would be difficult. In response, the U.S. said, according to daily Cumhuriyet: “Turkey isn’t the only neighboring country doing business with Iran. These difficulties do not pertain only to Turkey. This is not a trade embargo. It’s a controlled effort that will take time and energy. Its legitimacy lies in U.N. decisions.”

Swedish Rape Warrant For Assange Allegedly Issued and Cancelled In One Day

[The more that the public sees the American government dip into its bag of dirty tricks, the quicker that they learn to see through the bullshit.]

Swedish rape warrant for Wikileaks’ Assange cancelled

Julian Assange
Julian Assange had been cited as saying the release of the allegations was “deeply disturbing”

Sweden has cancelled an arrest warrant for Wikileaks founder Julian Assange on accusations of rape and molestation.

The Swedish Prosecution Authority website said the chief prosecutor had come to the decision that Mr Assange was not suspected of rape but did not give any further explanation.

The warrant was issued late on Friday.

Wikileaks, which has been criticised for leaking Afghan war documents, had quoted Mr Assange as saying the charges were “without basis”.

That message, which appeared on Twitter and was attributed directly to Mr Assange, said the appearance of the allegations “at this moment is deeply disturbing”.

In a series of other messages posted on the Wikileaks Twitter feed, the whistle-blowing website said: “No-one here has been contacted by Swedish police”, and that it had been warned to expect “dirty tricks”.

In its “official blog” on Saturday before the warrant was cancelled, Wikileaks said it was “deeply concerned about the seriousness of these allegations. We the people behind Wikileaks think highly of Julian and and he has our full support”.

The current whereabouts of Mr Assange, a 39-year-old Australian, are unclear.

More documents

The Swedish Prosecution Authority website said chief prosecutor Eva Finne had come to the decision that Julian Assange was not subject to arrest.

In a brief statement Eva Finne said: “I don’t think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape.”

The website said there would be no further immediate comment.

Earlier, Karin Rosander, communications head at Sweden’s prosecutors’ office, said there were two separate allegations against Mr Assange, one of rape and the other of molestation. She gave no details of the accusations. She said that as far as she knew they related to alleged incidents that took place in Sweden.

Media reports say Mr Assange was in Sweden last week to talk about his work and defend the decision by Wikileaks to publish the Afghan war logs.

Last month, Wikileaks published more than 75,000 secret US military documents on the war in Afghanistan.

US authorities criticised the leak, saying it could put the lives of coalition soldiers and Afghans, especially informers, at risk.

Mr Assange has said that Wikileaks is intending to release a further 15,000 documents in the coming weeks.

The Sacking of Amrullah Saleh

Wood engraving depicting the British massacre in the first Anglo-Afghan War, 1838-1842

Souter Takes The Call

As the Great Game repeats itself, India must wake up to Karzai’s new moves

In 1843, shortly after his return from Afghanistan, an army chaplain named Rev G.H. Gleig wrote a memoir of the disastrous First Anglo-Afghan War of which he was one of the very few survivors. It was, he wrote, “a war begun for no wise purpose, carried on with a strange mixture of rashness and timidity, brought to a close after suffering and disaster, without much glory attached either to the government which directed, or the great body of troops which waged it. Not one benefit, political or military, was acquired with this war. Our eventual evacuation of the country resembled the retreat of an army defeated”.

It would be difficult to imagine any military adventure today going quite as badly as the First Anglo-Afghan War, an abortive experiment in Great Game colonialism that ended with an entire East India Company army utterly routed by poorly equipped tribesmen, at the cost of Rs 80 billion and over 40,000 lives. But this month, almost 10 years on from NATO’s invasion of Afghanistan, there were increasing signs that the current Afghan war, like so many before them, could still end in another embarrassing withdrawal after a humiliating defeat, with Afghanistan yet again left in tribal chaos, possibly partitioned and ruled by the same government which the war was originally fought to overthrow.

Certainly it is becoming clearer than ever that the once-hated Taliban, far from being defeated by the surge, are instead beginning to converge on, and effectively besiege, Kabul in what is beginning to look like the final act in the history of Karzai’s western-installed puppet government. For the Taliban have now reorganised, and advanced out of their borderland safe havens. They are now massing at the gates of Kabul, surrounding the capital, much as the US-backed mujahideen once did to the Soviet-installed regime in the late ’80s. The Taliban controls over 70 per cent of the country, where it collects taxes, enforces the sharia and dispenses its usual rough justice. Every month their sphere of influence increases. According to a recent Pentagon report, Karzai’s government only controls 29 out of 121 key strategic districts.

Last month marked a new low with the Taliban inflicting higher levels of casualties on both civilians and NATO forces than ever before and regaining control of the opium-growing centre of Marja in Helmand, only three months after being driven out by American forces amid much gung-ho cheerleading in the US media.

The Taliban are massing at the gates of Kabul, much as the US-backed mujahideen once did in the late ’80s.

Worse still, there are unsettling and persistent rumours that Karzai is trying to reach some sort of accommodation with elements in Pakistan that aid and assist the Taliban: the ISI head, Lt General Ahmad Shuja Pasha, has secretly been shuttling to and from Islamabad to meet Karzai, and last month, General Kayani, head of the Pakistani army, visited Kabul.This followed the sacking of Amrullah Saleh, Karzai’s very pro-Indian security chief. Saleh is a tough, burly and intimidating Tajik with a piercing, unblinking stare, who rose to prominence as a mujahideen protege of Ahmed Shah Masood, the legendary, India-backed Lion of the Panjshir. Saleh brought these impeccable credentials to his job after the American conquest, ruthlessly hunting down and interrogating any Taliban he could find, with little regard for notions of human rights.

The Taliban, and their backers in the ISI, regarded him as their fiercest enemy, something he was enormously proud of. When I had dinner with him in Kabul in May, he spoke at length of his frustration with the Karzai government’s ineffectiveness in taking the fight to the Taliban, and the degree to which the ISI was still managing to aid, arm and train their pocket insurgents in Waziristan, Sindh and Balochistan.

Saleh’s sacking in early June merited much less newsprint than last month’s sacking of General Stanley McChrystal. Yet in reality, McChrystal’s departure reflects only a minor personnel change, no important alteration in strategy. The sacking of Saleh, however, gave notice of a major and ominous change of direction by President Karzai.

Bruce Riedel, Obama’s Afpak advisor, said when the news broke: “Karzai’s decision to sack Saleh and (Hanif) Atmar (head of the interior ministry) has worried me more than any other development, because it means Karzai is already planning for a post-American Afghanistan.”

US soldiers frisk an Afghan during a patrol in Shahwali Kot, in Kandahar, Afghanistan
(Photograph by AFP, From Outlook, August 30, 2010)

The implication is that Pakistan is encouraging some sort of accommodation between Karzai and the ISI-sponsored jehadi network of Sirajuddin Haqqani, which could give over much of the Pashtun south to Haqqani, but preserve Karzai in power in Kabul. The Americans have been party to none of this, and administration officials have been quoted as being alarmed by the news.

India’s expulsion from Afghanistan, or at least a severe rolling back of its presence, can be presumed to be a demand on the ISI shopping list in return for a deal. Under Karzai, India had increasing political and economic influence in Afghanistan—it opened four regional consulates, and provided around $662 million of reconstruction assistance. Pakistan’s military establishment has always believed it would be suicide to accept an Indian presence in what they regard as their strategic backyard, and is completely paranoid about the still small Indian presence—rather as the British used to be about Russians in Afghanistan during the days of the Great Game.

MEA sources say there are less than 3,600 Indians in Afghanistan, almost all of them businessmen and contract workers; there are only 10 Indian diplomatic officers as opposed to nearly 150 in the UK embassy. Yet the horror of being squeezed in an Indian nutcracker has led the ISI to risk Pakistan’s own internal security and coherence, as well as its strategic relationship with the US, in order to keep the Taliban in play, and its leadership under watch and ISI patronage in Quetta, something the Wikileaks documents amply confirmed.

The horror of being squeezed in an Indian nutcracker forces Pakistan to risk all to keep the Taliban in play.

If it is true that Karzai is tilting away from NATO and India, and towards Pakistan, it would represent a strategic victory for the Pakistani military, and a diplomatic defeat for India—though the ISI will have to first deliver the Taliban, who still say they are unwilling to negotiate with Karzai. It also remains to be seen whether Pakistan can be defended from the jehadi Frankenstein’s monster its military has created: the recent bomb blasts in Lahore at the shrine of Datta Sahib would seem further evidence to indicate not. The other question is whether India can succeed in its reported attempts to resuscitate the Northern Alliance as a contingency against the Taliban’s takeover of the south, possibly in conjunction with Russia, Iran and the Central Asian ‘stans’.Either way, within Afghanistan, it’s a grim picture. Already, it’s now impossible—or at least extremely foolhardy—for any foreigner to walk even in Kabul without armed guards; it is even more inadvisable to head out of town in any direction except north: the strongly anti-Taliban Panjshir Valley, and the towns of Mazar and Herat, are really the only safe havens left for non-Afghans in the entire country, despite the massive troops levels all over. In all other directions, travel is only possible in an armed convoy. This is especially so around the Khoord Kabul and Tezeen Passes, immediately to the south of Kabul, where around 18,000 East India Company troops, many of them Indian sepoys, were lost in 1842, and which is today again a centre of resistance against foreign troops.   (read HERE)

The Inhumanity Inherent In Capitalists

Responses to “Refusal to endorse water as a human right exposes the US and UN conspiracy”

Geeth Says:
August 9th, 2010 at 6:42 am


World’s largest fresh water reserves, the five great lakes are resting between two countries, the USA and Canada. The other greatest water stream is located in the South America, the Amazon River. Transnational Corporations’ are encroaching the exterior domains of traditionally known production and markets. Drinking water has been the target of Trans National Corporations for couple of decades now. The pressure of IMF and World Bank for the privatization of water resources in Sri Lanka including ancient reservoirs was not a secret, and it is still in the cards. The sole objective is to build a monopoly of global drinking water supply into the hands of TNCs. The day they achieve this target will mark the day of ultimate western dominance upon global humanity. From that point onward, the man’s right to life will be in the hands of TNCs. And thus the ultimate subjugation of the humanity of the rest will be achieved.

Although I do not agree with Marxism for many reasons, Marx’s analysis of the future of capitalism has never been challenged by any one yet. When even the capitalist wants to mirror his own image, he even reads Marx. Day by day capitalism proves that Marx was right abut capitalist’s inhuman soul. Our cultural upbringing never even allows us to believe their callousness because we can never conceive it through the logic we culturally accustomed with. We can never rationalize their objectives and agendas of working on future drinking water monopoly in global scale because naturally we question “why and for what reason anybody wants to do that?” For us it seems illogical and therefore we do not see any sense in it; but for the west, it is more than logical and make a lot of sense. In future, things are going to be much uglier than we can picture now.

Marx envisioned this situation more than hundred years ago. Although we are boasting about post French revolutionary modern achievements, we can feel that there is a big pitfall along the way of global humanity; and as I said, things are going to get much uglier than we can envision. I even do not believe that avoiding world war three is a possibility. The war is inevitable. My concern is that, most probably this war may fought in Indian Ocean and Sri Lanka will be in the midst of it. Our belief in modern progress has brought us to a dead end in which we can see only conflicts and disasters and ultimate subjugation of humanity by TNCs or else, freedom with enormous sacrifice and cost.

We all were given a beautiful rosy picture of modern progress, and we never knew that we were being herding to our own slavery by a very few of the world. Marshal Berman beautifully tells us a part of the story of modernism like this… “

“There is a mode of vital experience – experience of space and time, of the self and others, of life’s possibilities and perils—that is shared by men and women all over the world today. I will call this body of experience ‘Modernity’. To be modern is to find our selves in an environment that promises adventure, power, joy, growth, transformation of ourselves and the world – and at the same time, that threatens to destroy everything we have, everything we know, everything we are. Modern environments and experiences cut across all boundaries of geography and ethnicity, of class and nationality, of religion and ideology; in this sense, modernity can be said to unite all mankind. But it is a paradoxical unity, a unity of disunity; it pours us all into a maelstrom of perpetual disintegration and renewal, of struggle and contradiction, of ambiguity and anguish To be modern is to be a part of a universe in which, as Marx said, ‘all that is solid melts into air” (Marshal Berman, “All that is solid melts into Air” 1982)
You know Ajith, as an artist, a humanist, and an activist against all sorts of marginality and dominance, I can feel the gravity of your article in its maximum effect not only mentally, but also even physically I can feel it. Because after reading it, I felt almost throwing up by the disgusting feeling of the contempt for knowing the intentions of western administrations’ and the depths to the low levels they prepared to go down to subjugate the rest of global humanity. Their moral bankruptcy is unbelievable.

The American/Western Conspiracy to Control the World’s Fresh Water Supplies

Refusal to endorse water as a human right exposes the US and UN conspiracy

Posted on August 8th, 2010

Ajit Randeniya

Late last month, there were two pointers, both arising from the UN within the span of just two days, that exposed the ugliness of the US devised human rights conspiracy and the increasingly visible face of the UN as an organisation serving only the interests of the rich, domineering countries.

On 28 July, the champions of the global human rights movement, the US, the EU (except Germany and Spain), Canada, and Australia, abstained from voting for a resolution presented by Pablo Solon, the Bolivian ambassador to the UN, co-sponsored by 31 other countries, declaring that: “safe and clean drinking water and sanitation is a human right that is essential for the full enjoyment of life and all human rights.”

Unbelievably, just two days later on 30 July, Jean-Paul Laborde, chairman of the UN Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTITF), demanded that the African countries ‘get their act together’ in fighting terrorism!

In short, this French pale-skin comprador was reinforcing, on behalf of the alliance he was representing, that the hungry and thirsty Africans need to forget about their own priorities and help the ‘G_d-chosen’ Europeans kill the opponents of their arrogant blood-sucking ways!

What needs to follow from this shameless demonstration of the ‘human rights conspiracy’ is that those in the developing world -including the so-called NGOs and INGOs, ‘transparency inspectors’, sundry ‘aid-workers’ and ‘think-tank operators’- who continue to serve in the post July 28 world in perpetuating the lie that the US (and other white nations) have any genuine interest in safeguarding ‘human rights’ are dealt with appropriately; the average citizen as well as governments now can take action. Here are some reasons why.

The world needed no reminder that the most pressing problem afflicting the world’s poor who account for more than five sixths of the global population, is lack of access to clean water: according to UN statistics, nearly one billion people lack access to safe drinking water, more than 2.6 billion have no basic sanitation and around 1.5 million children under age 5 die each year from water borne diseases, mainly diarrhoea.

This is the reason why the Bolivian resolution was supported so overwhelmingly by the developing world. The Bolivian ambassador’s speech included simple ‘facts of life’, that the human body and brain consisted predominantly of water that is its transport and cooling system, and that the human survival period without water is much shorter than that without food.

He also pointed out that the number of deaths resulting from the consumption of unclean water globally is higher than those resulting from AIDS, malaria and measles combined. An estimated 1.5 million children under age 5 die every year of diarrhoea.

What all these facts point to is that the lack of access to clean water is the greatest human rights violation, most certainly so when compared to the ‘rights’ promoted by the US and Europe mafia, of the freedoms to disrupt societies and to spy for foreign countries.

The resolution was voted in easily, with 122 countries voting in favour. But the most remarkable thing was the ‘curious’ abstention by 41 rich countries of the world, the champions of the global human rights campaign! No other international event in the recent past exposed the degree of utter contempt with which the US, EU and its lackeys treat the developing world, as much as this dishonourable act did.

The abstaining hypocrites accused the sponsors of the resolution of seeking to pre-empt the findings an independent expert, Portuguese lawyer Catarina de Albuquerque, who is due to report to the UN Human Rights Council next year on countries’ obligations related to water and sanitation. This is going to be another imposition on resource-starved developing country governments, so that the World Bank and IMF could come in with offers of ‘help’.

In explaining his country’s abstention, the appropriately named US delegate John ‘Sammis’ provided a disgusting parody of the double talk that is the hallmark of their conspiracies: he said, “We support the goal of universal access to safe drinking water. The US is ‘committed’ to working with our development partners …But he charged that “the resolution undermined the work underway in Geneva” and charged that ‘sponsors had rushed it through’.

In other words, the US human rights guardian is saying to the world: you have no ‘right’ for water; we’ll give you water when ‘we’ feel like it!

British delegate Nicola ‘Freedman’ said London “does not believe that there exists at present sufficient legal basis under international law to either declare or recognize water or sanitation as free-standing human rights”. The new Conservative government of David Cameron had already declared that it will oppose this resolution ‘unless it is amended to remove sanitation and only refer to ‘access’ to clean water, not the human right to water itself’.

In other words, the British imperialists are saying: ‘we’ make laws, not ‘you’!

Canada hid behind the false claim that the resolution might force it to share its water with the US, [therefore the poor should continue to die of thirst]; Australia preferred the route of water ‘markets’ [that allow the wealthy to appropriate water supplies for private profit] and not public ownership of water!

Insult to the injury in the minds of the developing country representatives at the General Assembly was added when, on 30 July, the French head of the CTITF demanded that African governments ‘take stronger steps’ to try to break connections between terrorism and organised crime, and, to broaden their anti-terrorist strategies beyond the military and law enforcement agencies.

He pointed to the recent killing of a French ‘aid worker’ in West Africa to show that Africa was a ‘hot spot’ for terrorism. He said that Africa’s often porous borders, low standards of living and political and social tensions were the ‘problems’. This Mr. Laborde’s game plan is to call up a meeting in early September to review the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy that was adopted in 2006, providing them another opportunity take the African’s minds away from their ‘real’ priority of economic development.

There are several aspects to the current conspiracy to block any ‘democratically based’ moves at the UN to promote the right to clean water as a human right: firstly, as it has already done, the move called the bluff of the US, EU and the rest of the pale-skins’ ‘commitment’ to protect human rights globally.

Their failure to support the right to water, that is biologically vital, exposes that their campaign is all about hindering the development of poor countries by creating chaos rather than to preserve right to life. To this extent, the Bolivian move has already achieved its aims by exposing this evil conspiracy.

Secondly, they are busily continuing with the campaign for the ‘privatisation’ of water resources in the ‘globalised’ world: a new World Bank reports has already created the demand-supply equation, by announcing that by 2030, global demand for water will exceed supply by more than 40%. This is the first step in the process of demanding of developing countries that they allow ‘market intervention’ to ‘rationally’ utilise this vital resource, with their capital of course!

The trend to privatise water has been resisted by the developing world at least since the year 2000 when the ‘globalisation’ thrust started it’s full swing. They started work towards a UN commitment that no one should be denied water for life because of an inability to pay, in the light of the water markets conspiracy.

UN recognition of water as a human right will shift the power of decision-making over water policy to national governments, undermining the power of the World Bank, the World Water Council and the World Trade Organisation, whose charter is creating market ‘solutions’.

The 28 July UN resolution may not have any legal standing due to access to water not being mentioned in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that was announced in 1948. But it opened the door for an annual report to the General Assembly on the topic from the UN expert on the issue.

Every now and then, humanity needs to take a collective look at various conspiracies that are consuming their lives and well being. The 28 July resolution provided one such opportunity by laying bare the US hypocrisy.